Seeing behind like infront

[naqshbandijamaati]

are you a shia?

 

[Ubaid]

inshaAllah, i won't engage with you further on this matter.

you are introducing new elements in the discussion which are also false. we will examine this in a separate thread, insha Allah:
i will grant it that you are right on this one but, one should not say this without mentioning the details and what zallah and khata'a means; and that it is not possible to commit saghayir which are dirty, base and despicable [like stealing. lying etc.]. you are deviating the topic in an entirely different direction while totally avoiding the main topic.

respected brother, that is fine by me. we think in different directions and from different frame of reference. the problems which such ideas create for natural deduction are the reason for me whereas scholars are the authority to you alone. everything that has been mentioned in this thread is relevent to the issue. for instance, you argued from appeal to majority scholars and in reply i said that majority scholars also held 'saghair sahvan' for the Prophets. whatever the details, 'blemishes' have been attributed to Prophets as you agree and i can feel another far-fetched looong post in the frame from you.
you must realise it is better to call reporters and muhadithin and mutakallimmen wa ghaira hu made mistakes and had flaws in their arguments instead of trying to justify scholars. in which case you are demeaning(in my view) the status of Prophets.
the standard is 'perfection' in dhaat and sifaat of Rasul Allah(sallalahu wa alayhi wa aalihi wasallam) and if anything or anyone states or argues otherwise then it unacceptable. three questions above have not and could not be anwered so alhamdolillah, my Prophet neither had any hizzush shaytaan nor made mistakes or did saghair whilst forgetting.

one thing also has become clear that your initial calim that it is only 'miniscule minority' has also been proven wrong. it is not a new element brother but very much relevent to the basis of your argument.

no hard feelings and i love you and respect you. next time address the questions and not ad hominem the person because it is very easy for logicians to tell who has a weak argument.

 

[Ubaid]

are you a shia?

no. because they also under taqiya justify things that are demeaning for Prophets(alayhum assalaam).

note: taqleed in aqida is haram.

Ya Shaykh Abd al Qadir al Jilani :ra: Shay'an Lillah!

 

[Noori]

have you been on our portal before with a different id? if yes then why don't you use previous one, were you banned before due to same nonsensical arguments?

 

[Ubaid]

nonsensical arguments?

I am Ubaid. this is who i am. i can pm you my address if you want to meet with me. i am often back and forth from Dubai so wherever you want i will meet you, inshAllah.

it is no surprise that when you are unable to reply then go personal. something typical of people in dogmatic sleep.

 

[sherkhan]

I am Ubaid. this is who i am.

You are hollow and dumber than the dumbest person I have seen. Go wallow in your self-serving delusions and you will be justly served sooner or later. I'm being personal since I'm dogmatic! (I don't know what "dogmatic sleep" means)

Brother nJ asked if you had a shaikh or a teacher. I doubt if you have ever had one. You seem to be a self-taught person. When you are writing a book to benefit the entire ummah with your 'original' whacky interpretations? We had a teaser (actually 3 of them) from you and can't wait for more!